🔗 Share this article

Apple could be required to permit rivals to operate separate app stores on iPhones in the UK, after a ruling from the competition regulator.

This represents a major shift to the company's infamous "closed system" where applications can only be installed from its own official marketplace.

But the UK competition watchdog has designated both the tech giants as having "strategic market status" - indicating they have a lot of power over smartphone ecosystems.

Regulatory Findings

The regulator said the tech firms "could be restricting progress and market rivalry".

But the authority clarified it did not "find or assume wrongdoing" from the firms.

"The app economy contributes 1.5% of the UK's GDP and sustains around four hundred thousand positions, which is why it's essential these markets function properly for business," commented a top executive from the competition authority.

Around ninety to one hundred percent of UK mobile devices run on Apple or Google's mobile platforms, creating what the authority calls an "effective duopoly".

Based on current data, 48.5% of British smartphone users use an Apple device - which runs Apple's iOS - with the overwhelming bulk of the remaining users using Google's Android.

The Company's Response

The CMA's investigation focused on how dominant Apple and Google's own applications are compared with rivals - as well as their web applications and platform software.

It is unclear what modifications the regulator will look to request, but previously it published guidelines detailing possible actions it could take.

These comprise requiring it to be easier for people to transition between iOS and Android phones, and for both companies to rank apps "fairly and openly" in their marketplaces.

The Cupertino company specifically may be compelled to allow third-party marketplaces on its products, and enable people to download programs straight from developer sites.

This would follow comparable regulations in the European Union, which previously imposed measures against the company for anti-competitive behaviour.

Apple cautioned the UK could face delays to getting new features - as has happened in the European Union - which the company attributes to heavy regulation.

For example, some Apple Intelligence features which have been rolled out in other parts of the world are not available in the EU.

"Apple encounters intense rivalry in every sector where we operate, and we work tirelessly to create the finest offerings, solutions and user experience," the organization said in a statement.

"Britain's implementation of EU-style rules would weaken that, leaving users with weaker privacy and safety, delayed access to latest functions, and a divided, less seamless user journey."

Google's Position

Google device owners can currently use alternative marketplaces - though critics say they are not as user-friendly as the company's official Play Store.

The regulator's plan said Google may have to "modify the interface" of installing applications directly from online sources, as well as "eliminate barriers" when using third-party platforms.

"There appears to be no the justification for the current classification," a company competition lead remarked.

The representative said "the majority" of Google device owners use alternative app stores or install applications straight from a developer's website, and asserted there is a much wider selection of apps available for Android users compared to those on Apple devices.

"There are now 24,000 Android phone models from thirteen hundred device makers globally, facing intense competition from iOS in the UK," the representative added.

Google's platform is an open-source operating system, which means creators can use and build on top of it for free.

The company contends this means it promotes market competition.

But advocacy organizations said restrictions on these companies' power in different nations "are already helping businesses to develop and giving customers more options".

"The companies' control is now creating genuine problems by limiting options for consumers and competition for companies," commented a consumer advocate.